A report on the latest developments from the global warming talks
in Buenos Aires from the Buenos Aires Global Warming Summit Information
Center's on-site reporter, John Carlisle.

Global Warming Treaty Criticized by Both Democrat and Republican
Congressmen

One of the more interesting events during the Buenos Aires talks today
was a press conference sponsored by six U.S. Congressmen opposed to the
treaty. The congressmen were: Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Rep. Joe
Knollenberg (R-MI), Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), Rep. Ron Klink (D-PA), Rep.
JoAnne Emerson (R-MO) and Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA).

The Congressmen discussed both the negative economic impact of the Kyoto
Protocol and the failure of treaty to require developing nations to reduce
their own carbon dioxide emissions.

Rep. Ron Klink explained that his district lost 155,000 steel industry
jobs, in part because the companies were forced to spend time and money
complying with excessive environmental laws rather than on much-needed modernization.
Klink also suggested that Hurricane Mitch resulted in a greater loss of
life when it hit Central America than when it hit the U.S. mainland because
wealthy nations like the U.S. can afford to build the drainage systems and
other infrastructure that greatly minimizes the loss of life from such storms.
He suggested that what developing nations need is more economic growth and
development, not potentially crippling caps on CO2 emissions that would
stunt it.

One reporter asked if congressional opposition was simply motivated by
partisan politics. Rep. Joe Barton rejected this notion, saying he believes
that about 75% of House Republicans and more than half of all Democrats
are opposed to the treaty with similar breakdowns on the Senate side. Rep.
Klink said that at least 7 of Pennsylvania1s 11 Democrat House members are
opposed to the treaty. Rep. JoAnne Emerson, who sits on the Agriculture
committee, said 9 out 10 Republicans and 9 out of 10 Democrats on the committee
oppose the treaty. Rep. Klink also noted that Rep. John Dingell (D-MI),
the Democrat with the most seniority in the House, is opposed to the treaty
as is Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV). Klink said Byrd sent President Clinton
a letter on November 9 asking him not to sign the treaty.

Rep. Sensenbrenner focused most of his attention on the legal issues.
His chief argument was that Kyoto can only be approved if developing nations
are included, but the treaty prohibits any major changes until it is ratified.
By accepting this limitation on changes, Sensenbrenner says the Administration
has backed itself into a corner. The Senate will not ratify the treaty as
is but can only make changes if it does ratify.

Sensenbrenner also suggested that there isn't sufficient scientific evidence
that human-induced global warming is underway.

(Editor's note: The Washington-based Ozone Action responded to this
press conference with a press release branding the congressional delegation
a "national embarrassment" that put on a "hideous display
of ignorance, selfishness and isolationism that has soiled the proceedings
of the climate negotiations." Our view of Ozone Action's statement:
If you can't refute the facts, try a little name calling.)

European Union Advances Double Standard

During its daily press conference, European Union (EU) representatives
restated their strong opposition to an international greenhouse gas emissions
trading scheme that would allow nations to exceed their emissions limits
by purchasing unused emissions credits from abroad. The Kyoto Protocol,
the EU argued, only allows trading domestically, not internationally. At
the same time, the EU insists that EU member countries, such as France,
Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom, be allowed to trade emissions credits
among themselves. They are apparently oblivious to the fact that the EU
is not a nation, but a group of nations.

One EU representative said she believed that the U.S. would move closer
to the EU position in the coming days, citing the increasing support for
emissions reduction among several American corporations.

Right after the EU press conference, however, the U.S. delegation, led
by Stuart Eizenstat, restated its strong support for emissions trading.
In arguing for trading, Eizenstat said that while no nation could meet its
Kyoto targets without some sort of significant domestic reduction program,
without emissions trading the costs of Kyoto to a typical American family
would be excessive. Eizenstat stated that with a global emissions trading
scheme, the cost of the Kyoto targets for an American family (within 20
years) would be about $7,000 per year. Without emissions trading, that cost
would triple or quadruple that $7,000 figure. Eizenstat also said that emissions
trading would benefit other countries as well, including European countries.
He said that without emissions trading, the cost for Europeans would jump
by 200 to 300 percent.

U.S. and European negotiators remain far apart on emissions trading,
one of the key issues that has paralysed efforts in Buenos Aires to come
to an agreement. Carlos Merenson, head of Argentina's sustainable development
unit, says permanent disagreements between rich and poor nations and the
U.S. and Europe are paralyzing progress on COP-4 talks. "We think the
negotiations have become very tense, they are going on in a conflictive
atmosphere. We've lost the spirit that we should act in good faith toward
a common goal." Taking the Clinton Administration's side, Merenson
said the EU is too intransigent.

In other news, Stuart Eizenstat was asked if President Clinton planned
to sign the treaty before the close of the conference. Eizenstat refused
to give a definite answer. He did say that there was an advantage to signing
it this year, claiming that signing it would solidify the long-term goals
of Kyoto and thus keep it alive. Eizenstat added, though, that Clinton's
signing would not obligate the U.S. to adhere to its provisions as it conflicts
with the constitutional requirement for Senate ratification.